Basically, what I have learned from this thread is that a lot of people view ‘nursery’ as ‘childcare’, and that ‘nursery’ is unappreciated as an educational setting.
Unappreciated isn’t the right word. Unprioritised is what I would say.
When I’m working full time my main priority is knowing I can trust that I can drop my children off with people who will look after them when I can’t. I send my child to be cared for in my absence.
I care more that they will be fed, cleaned, played with and cuddled more than taught how to recognise their names or count. Sending my child to nursery isn’t a choice, sending them is a necessity to their development wellbeing.
Why? So that I can work to pay for the home for them to develop in. Fifteen free hours at two would have been life changing for our family. More disposable income, certainly better mental health of both me and my husband and more flexibility in my working schedule.
But we didn’t get it. The children entitled to fifteen hours from ‘disadvantaged backgrounds’ have received additional support that children of ‘rich, working parents’ haven’t.
Should nursery be free for all? That would be lovely. For children of all backgrounds regardless of income, but it won’t be because nurseries and preschool are private educational settings for the most part. Certainly round here we don’t have any council run childcare facilities so unfortunately it will always be a matter of you get what you pay for.
I mentioned up thread but it’s been lost that studies have found the educational and developmental advantages of children who attend nursery vs those who don’t is limited. In all cases those advantages wear off by the end of reception.
Funding (if all children received 30 free hours) that would be spent on short term developmental advantages would be SO MUCH better spent if invested into the already hideously underfunded social support units that would actually make a difference to children in the long run.